I was sweeping out my garage the other day and found myself thinking about Bladerunner and how it has been awhile since I had seen it. I then starting thinking about the issue of Deckard as human or Replicant, and suddenly a line that is present in both movies, is spoken near the end, and needs no reference to any scene added or removed, when the asian cop guy meets Deckard on the roof after Roy expires. He tosses Deckard the blaster he had dropped earlier and says:

"You've done a man's job, sir."

That settled it for me for sure (although after seeing the Director's cut way back when, I was strongly leaning towards Deckard as Replicant anyway).

Whilst not 'proof', I too have always thought that line was a good indication that Deckard is a Replicant. Why would Gaff use those words if he knew Deckard was a human after all? The only other explanation that I can think of to explain away those choice of words is to suggest that Gaff was either questioning Deckard's sexuality (unlikely) or that he was somehow patronising Deckard in way that an experienced Blade Runner might patronise a 'rookie' (also unlikely, seeing as Deckard is supposed to be 'the best').

For me, Gaff knew Deckard was Rep and he used those words to let Deckard know. The origami unicorn was further confirmation - though it's only significant in the Director's Cut.

Richard Gunn

We each live in our own realities - who's maintaining yours?

The only thing that you can be 100% sure of, is that you can't be 100% sure of anything.

It is strange that Deck-a-Reppers can take a straightforward statement and say it must mean the opposite of what it says!

Gaff starts the movie disrespecting Deckard big time. At the end, he grudgingly can respect Deckard (while still wanting him out of town), so he says, "You've done a mans' job, sir." A simple compliment. No need for any convoluted explanation that says it means the opposite.

And additionally one can even see that in Gaff's eyes, it is a man's job to terminate replicants. (Don't forget the chicken origami which could easily be Gaff saying Deckard isn't man enough to take on the job.)

I disagree - if that's a 'simple compliment' it's a very patronising one.

Patronising in the same way that this comment is:

It is strange that Deck-a-Reppers can take a straightforward statement and say it must mean the opposite of what it says!

Why is it strange? Just because someone interprets an ambiguous statement differently to you, doesn't make it invalid (or strange). I would have thought you, of all people, would have realised that by now.

Richard Gunn

We each live in our own realities - who's maintaining yours?

The only thing that you can be 100% sure of, is that you can't be 100% sure of anything.

[quote= "questioning Deckard's sexuality (unlikely) or that he was somehow patronising Deckard in way that an experienced Blade Runner might patronise a 'rookie' (also unlikely, seeing as Deckard is supposed to be 'the best').[/quote]

i can see it both ways

for him being a rep yea he was saying "man's" as in real persons and if you watch it and notice harisons face he kinda has a puzzled look about him as if he questions the meaning is he real, is he a rep

but the reason i quoted was because i had a different take on that.

i think if deck was real and gaff said that was because he was either questioning his masculinity if you look at how he looks at deck after he retires zora he obviously looking down at him. Gaff dosent like deckard if you remember in future noir the translation of the unspoken dialouge in the spinner on the way to the police HQ so if deck was real gaff was jus making fun of him

I agree with BR Movie as to the meaning of the phrase, being a ?Deck-a-human? believer myself. But I understand how that phrase can have different meanings to different people. So each to his or her own. I don?t? think, however, that that is the ?definitive? phase that ?says it all?. Just like it took many factors for me to prefer to see Deckard as human, it should also many factors to other to think of him as a rep.

BR12819 wrote:what if gaff had retired rachel what would deck have done.

Dunno - ask Tyrell Corp for another Rachael. Perhaps a 'pleasure model' made in the Rachael 'mold'.

If Deck thought he was a Rep perhaps he'd decide that there was no point in living any more and committed suicide. Or perhaps he would confront Gaff and Bryant about the whole assignment.

For the record I don't "believe" Deckard is either human or replicant - I think "believe" is the wrong term. I "like" the idea of Deckard being a Replicant but I don't discard the idea of him being human just because I prefer him as a rep. I wish people would stop labeling others as "Deck-a-Rep Believers" as if it somehow diminishes the validity of their point-of-view. Neither position is any less valid than the other.

I think in order to see Deckard as either a rep or human you need evidence, not just one line or scene. I believe Deck is a Rep, simply because of the overwhelming evidence to suggest this. Why would all these lines and images by ambiguous if they weren't supposd to suggest something?

Coming back to Gaff's comment. Yes I do think it means Deck is a Rep, but it also be grudging praise from Gaff. He says it in a slightly mocking way, which of course suggests he's a rep. But it could also mean that Gaff is simply praisng Deckard.

'You'va done a man's job, sir" to me is like the saying "you've done it like a man", you know that phrase. So Gaff is describing Deckard's work as how a man, not a wuss, would do it. Something like that.

DeckLA2019a wrote:what stood out in my mind is that first conversation with Bryant in the movie veiwing room, Deckard didnt know the 4 year life span, if he was human, and working for the police wouldnt he know?

No.. because he`s a ex Blade Runner.. not been in service for a while.. and Nexus 6 are new models. Deckard is simply not up-to-date.

And personly i find it strange (if Deck is a rep..) that Reps are forbidden on earth... but Deckard is free to roam the streets as a retired replicant cop... nahh...

But i confess that the DC versions wants to tell us that Deck is a Rep..
Or really really make us think about it...

I dont like it, cos the DC changes the original version, where for me, Deck is human without a doubt.

I saw the DC Version a couple of days ago and I don't think it changes anything at all.
Scott said that the unicorn dream sequence was supposed to hint at Deckard being a replicant.
What struck me is, that Scott didn't remove Gaff's voice over when Deckard finds the origami unicorn. (Deckard picks up the unicorn and we hear Gaff's voice from the off: "To bad she won't live - but then again who does")
This way it seems like Gaff knows that Rachael is going to live. Deckard's expression supports this hint - he looks rather happy when he finds the unicorn.
If the unicorn was a hint for Deckard being a replicant, shouldn't he look more confused or something?
Scott might have inserted the unicorn sequence, but he couldn't change Harrison Ford's expression.
So, Partizan, we can both enjoy the DC and still believe without a doubt that Deckard is a human.

Luba Luft wrote:I saw the DC Version a couple of days ago and I don't think it changes anything at all.Scott said that the unicorn dream sequence was supposed to hint at Deckard being a replicant.What struck me is, that Scott didn't remove Gaff's voice over when Deckard finds the origami unicorn. (Deckard picks up the unicorn and we hear Gaff's voice from the off: "To bad she won't live - but then again who does")This way it seems like Gaff knows that Rachael is going to live. Deckard's expression supports this hint - he looks rather happy when he finds the unicorn. If the unicorn was a hint for Deckard being a replicant, shouldn't he look more confused or something?Scott might have inserted the unicorn sequence, but he couldn't change Harrison Ford's expression.So, Partizan, we can both enjoy the DC and still believe without a doubt that Deckard is a human.

Well, you can interpret it anyway you want - I think your interpretation makes less sense, but that's just my opinion.

Richard Gunn

We each live in our own realities - who's maintaining yours?

The only thing that you can be 100% sure of, is that you can't be 100% sure of anything.